Miles Andrew, Upenieks Laura
University of Toronto, Canada.
University of Toronto, Canada.
Soc Sci Res. 2018 May;72:1-19. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2018.02.004. Epub 2018 Feb 14.
Most research on moral identities conceptualizes morality exclusively in terms of care and justice, but work from across the social sciences indicates that these represent only a corner of the moral landscape. Emphasizing care and justice alone severely restricts the scope of moral identity models, and risks under-estimating the influence of moral self-processes. To address this, we develop and validate measures of moral identity focused on group loyalty, authority, and purity, three additional facets of morality highlighted in Moral Foundations Theory. Although the loyalty identity is remarkably similar to the care/justice identity, the authority and purity identities are distinct, and demonstrate adequate convergent, divergent, and nomological validity. These identities also predict a wide range of behaviors that traditional care/justice focused moral identities miss. Taken together, our work indicates that the moral self is more complex - and has a much wider scope of influence - than previously supposed.
大多数关于道德认同的研究仅从关怀和正义的角度来概念化道德，但来自社会科学各领域的研究表明，这些仅仅代表了道德版图的一个角落。仅强调关怀和正义会严重限制道德认同模型的范围，并有可能低估道德自我过程的影响。为了解决这个问题，我们开发并验证了聚焦于群体忠诚、权威和纯洁性的道德认同测量方法，这是道德基础理论中突出的道德的另外三个方面。尽管忠诚认同与关怀/正义认同非常相似，但权威认同和纯洁认同是不同的，并且显示出足够的聚合效度、区分效度和法则效度。这些认同还预测了一系列传统的以关怀/正义为重点的道德认同所遗漏的行为。综合来看，我们的研究表明，道德自我比之前认为的更为复杂，其影响范围也更广。
